A workflow system, which defines the procedure for a series of business processes with multiple workers and manages actual workflow to put it into practice, implements management and operation of business processes by means of computerization, thereby making the work more efficient. In terms of efficiency of paperwork in an office, space costs for file cabinets, and environmental problems, etc., there is a significant need to construct a forms processing system to computerize elements of the workflow such as form processing, thereby implementing paperless management. However, actual form processing is so complicated that a paperless forms processing system has not been widely used due to problems of reaction to exception treatments, for example.
As an example of prior art workflow systems, Japanese Published Unexamined Patent Application (PUPA) No. 1998-105623 discloses a technique for dividing and registering definition information for a workflow, wherein the information divided and registered is shared among a plurality of workflows. This enables partial change of the process or partial stop and restart of the process, thereby allowing for efficient and meticulous management. Furthermore, PUPA No. 1998-134127 discloses a technique for, when withdrawing the circular that has been delayed, announcing beforehand to a worker who is presently processing the circular and workers who are to process the circular later, thereby preventing disturbances of business processes of each worker. Furthermore, PUPA No. 2000-137763 discloses a technique for not delaying the business processes if a user in charge of transaction can not conduct the transaction of business processes from unavoidable circumstances, wherein a lapsed time is monitored from when an electronic document was sent to a given node, and if a time limit is reached without completing the transaction, the electronic document is automatically skipped. In addition, there has been proposed a technique wherein an “alternate” is established instead of skipping.
As described above, skip processing has been conventionally conducted automatically to avoid delay of workflow. Also, in stead of skipping, an alternate may be established, wherein another person specified as an alternate can conduct the transaction instead of a person essentially in charge of a transaction. However, with such an “alternate” scheme, it is a prerequisite to establish an alternate in advance, as it does not function at all if the person in charge suddenly becomes unable to complete a transaction. On the other hand, if a manager dynamically establishes an alternate, activities might be able to be processed at that moment, however, the person in charge of the transaction could not be involved at all.
Also, according to the automatic skipping scheme of the above-mentioned PUPA No. 2000-137763, activities for deadline-designated automatic processing are skipped unless a person in charge has conducted the transaction by the designated date, thus this person could not be involved in the process. Namely, if a person in charge is simply skipped, the person is excluded from the process making the business process incomplete as a whole resulting in the workflow being incomplete.